Friday, December 27, 2013

As the final hours of 2013 wind down we should reflect on
all our New Year’s resolutions from last year. Of course, it’s the rare bird
that at year’s end is fluffing their feathers having made good on all their
personal promises: to quit smoking, lose weight, learn a new language or
instrument, or try to be more tolerant and show patience with the many little
annoyances of daily life.

We should take solace on the achieving of some and try with
greater fortitude in the upcoming year to achieve the rest. Likewise as anationin the family of nations, we should strive for the betterment of those
here in the U.S. and those around the world. Here’s hoping that:

·Politicians the world over stop spinning
rhetoric and act in harmony with their citizenry for the benefit of all.
Insteadof greedily grabbing with both
hands everything that is not nailed down.

·People of faith, atheists
and others who worship
whatever they think important co-exist without the need of ridiculing or
exterminating each other.

·Every fringe group stop feigning offense at
every little thing especially those things, that for millennia, have been
accepted tradition. For a twist, how about they be a bit more tolerant.

·We hear a whole lot less about young people in
America being gunned down every day.

·Bombs andreligion become mutually exclusive.

·Our leaders in America realize the toll of our
men and womenin foreign conflicts is a
price we no longer want to pay.

·World governments cooperate fully with each
other to stop human trafficking and put an end to poverty and hunger.

·World scientists make dramatic inroads in the
fight against disease and in predicting natural disasters to staveoff vast destruction in lives and
infrastructure.

·Real world peace can be achieved. Sounds like a
pipe dream but let’s hope. Solving the Israeli-Palestinian quandary would be a great first step.

·The Chinese compel their leaders to avert military
spending in favor of domestic projects; and thegovernment give up their expansionist dreams.

·President Obama use the remainder of his time in
office to fulfill his very first promise to bring our nation together and take
the necessary steps to create jobs for all who want one.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

With the last days of his tenure as New York Police
Commissioner winding down, we have much to thank Ray Kelly for. And not only
those of us who live the New York/New Jersey metro area. He and his team have
thwarted countless terrorism plots that would have had widespread consequences for
the entire nation.

After the horrific
attack on 9/11, Ray Kelly began his second stint as New York City Police
Commissioner and created the first
anti-terrorism bureau of any municipal police force in the country, even going
as far as stationing his officers in foreign countries to mine leads and gather
data on possible nascent plots.

Some of us may have
taken our security for granted since we
have not been attacked in New York going
on 13 years. But New York remains the
number one target of all jihadists. Because of the commissioner’s vigilance our enemies have focused their efforts elsewhere
as evidenced by the Boston Marathon bombing earlier this year. It’s hard not to
point fingers at the Boston PD but I suspect things could have gone differently
had Commissioner Kelly been in charge there.

Ray Kelly has always been a public servant. He was aVietnam combat veteran; he has
served 43 years in the NYPD; and in 1994,
Ray Kelly headed up the Multi National Force (MNF)to help restore order and democracy in Haiti.

Under Mayor Bloomberg and Commissioner Kelly, crime in New
York has consistently decreased while having to deal with a dwindlingpolice force. But these successes have come
at a cost, in at least, public perception. The so-called “stop and frisk” policy
which targets minority men has been roundly criticized. And its overall
effectiveness has been questioned. In the recent NYC mayoral election several
of the candidates expressed their unhappiness with the policy and their intent,
if elected, to replace Commissioner Kelly. And Mr. Kelly’s comments during that
campaign that not one of the candidates had asked for aterrorist briefing didn’t win him any friends.
Mayor-Elect de Blasio has already appointed Bill Bratton to succeed Kelly.

There was some talk that Mr. Kelly might be a candidate for
the vacant position of Homeland Security Secretary. Despite the senior Senator
from New YorkChuck Schumer’s glowing
endorsement of Kelly, President Obama selected Jeh Johnson for the
position. But it’s hard to believe anyone could be more effective than Kelly in
that role.

Ray Kelly leaves a great city in great shape and I’m sure
Commissioner Designate Bratton will continue to uphold his high standards.

Ray Kelly will now ride off into the sunset making lucrative
speeches for 5th Avenue Greater Talent Network. Our heartfelt
thanks, Commissioner.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

The one talent any American should feel proud about our
president is his ability to give speeches. At times he can conjure up memories
of “The Great Communicator,” Ronald Reagan; or John Kennedy. There are times
when I hear the florid phrases that roll off the president’s tongue and I think
of Ted Sorensen, JFK’s brilliant speechwriter and aide-de-camp.

The one difference among the three orators, besides, style,
is the message. Presidents Reagan and Kennedy espoused American
Exceptionalism.Obama adheres to the
theory that we’re just as ordinary as everyone else and, moreover, we are guilty of taking
advantage of those less fortunate. After all we didn’t build the country or the
great industrial machine that created
the middle class as he so foolishly
said in the run up to the 2012 election until, one assumes, focus groups
dissuaded him from doing so.

At the memorial service for Nelson Mandela he was his
predictable self, praising Mandela for reconciling with and forgiving his
oppressors. But interspersed were lines from his usual script, usurping the
spotlight for himself with his diatribe of rampant inequality, injustice and the intransigence of his Republican opposition at home.

This played well with the South African audience much like
it does when President Obama does his domestic tours. And I wonder, is it the
same audience that follows him around university campii and other democrat
strongholds who wildly applause as if an applause light goes off at the venue.
They stand there as an attentive backdrop like a pack of trained seals waiting
for a mackerel to be thrown their way.

The president spends too much time in his comfort zone.
Whether it’s with the well heeled Hollywood crowd who can’t thank him enough
for being our president or the likes of “Hardball” journalist, Chris Matthews
who toughest question for our chief executive is along the lines of what he had
for dinner the previous night. Even when the president is seen doing something
inappropriate like taking a “selfie” at the Mandela memorial, some
journalistsequated that to his being “just
like us.”

How sophomoric was that picture of President Obama with
Prime Minister David Cameron of Great Britain and Danish Prime Minister Helle
Thorning-Schmidt? The Danish Prime Minister looked like a high school
cheerleader captivated by her team’s quarterback. While PM Cameron looked like
the equipment manager straining his neck for inclusion in the picture. The only
adult in the photo was Michelle Obama who didn't look like she was going to be invited to the malt shop afterwards.

And I wouldn’t be surprised by the expression on the first lady’s face if there
was another Obama speech in South Africa – this one by Ms. Obama.

Thursday, December 5, 2013

With some interest I saw an advertisement for Hillary 2016
in the Sunday NY Times of December 1. Of course it was disguised as a real news
story about how Madam Hilary is trying to assuage the bad feelings with the
African-American communityfrom her last
presidential run.

It seems unfathomable in hindsight that the Clintons actually thought the
African-American community would support Hillary when then Sen. Obama was
running with her neck and neck in the primaries. As soon as the smallest excuse
arose, in this case, a nebulous characterization by former President Clinton
about Mr. Obama’s anti-war stance being “a
fairy tale” and an allusion that Jesse Jackson
had won the South Carolina primary twice, a frisson developed. So her first
order of business is to mend fences with the African-American community.

It’s inevitable that no group can be mad had the Clintons
for too long. Looking to repair the bad feelings caused by some of her husband’s
statements during the 2008 campaign, Hillary is out in front of the pack trying
to position herself for 2016. It’s too early to declare but you can bet she’ll
run. If you had as stellar a record as Secretary of State like Madam Clinton
wouldn’t you think you deserve to be president and return the country to the halcyon
days of her husband.

She has supported President
Obama since he was elected. But as his
poll numbers continue to sink, will she stand by him or will she distance
herself. If she decides on the latter, will it hurt her with the black
community and open up opportunities for possible candidates within the administration
like Vice President Biden and Secretary
of State Kerry; or, perhaps as some people have intimated, Sen. Warren of Massachusetts.
All three figure to stick with the president to the very end.

A lot, obviously, will have to do with fundraising .The
Hollywood money machine already seem ready to back Madam Clinton. But the success
of Hillary and the Democrats with all constituencies will depend on the success or fallout
from the Affordable Care Act and the
outcomeof immigration reform – very dicey
issues moving forward.

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

When someone tells me they have some good news and some bad news for me, I
usually opt for thegood news first. Not
knowing my degree ofgood fortune I
might not have to worry about the bad news. It looks as though the president
adheres to the same principle.

The Obamacare website fix has improved a great deal over the
last month. The White House announced on Sunday that
it had met its goal for improving HealthCare.gov so the website “will work smoothly for the vast majority
of users.” Purportedly the website is working90% of the time. In government speak that’s
a grand slam. To think the government can run anythingat full efficiency is a contradiction in
terms. But alas, now the bad news: The Obamacare website is working 90% of the
time.

Some very important issues remain. Many insurers are not
getting the requisite data from consumers needed to accurately assess coverage,
premiums and subsidies where appropriate. “Until the
enrollment process is working from end to end, many consumers will not be able
to enroll in coverage,” said Karen M. Ignagni, president of America’s Health
Insurance Plans, a trade group. In addition security issues have not been
resolved.

So in the very near future, expect
the Insurance companies to be demonized by the administration as the bad guys
in this noirish tale. And the Democrats, like an army of Charlie McCarthydummies, will bobble their headsaffirming the misconception.President Obama is adroit at rationing out
blame for his failures and quite frugal sharing victories.

But I don’t think the website fix and all the glowing
reports from administration officials as well as the spin from the president’s
adoring, sycophantic,Pravda-like press
will move his poll numbers in a positive direction. Because no matter how much
sweet smelling perfume you splash on a pile of steaming dogexcrement it doesn’t change the effluvia.

In the next phase of
this Edsel of a piece of legislation, people will beginto get a much clearer picture of the horrors that await them and
their families. Higher premiums and deductibles; and networks that will
precludethe possibility of being able
to continue with the doctors to whom they have entrusted their family’s health. And
the kicker is that it will be much more expensive than the rates they paid in
the pre-Obamacare era.

Thursday, November 28, 2013

I guess all anyone really needs to know about the
international accord reached with Iran is that they will continue to enrich
uranium and they will not dismantle any centrifuges. The
international community is strapped with having to accept these terms in the hopes a broader
agreement can reached at a later date.

Taking the Iranian nation on their word is a giant leap of
faith whatever your preferred denomination. Both the Saudis and the Israelis
have made their opposition known. As of yet no word from the Mormons and Amish.

With the Obama administration’s poll numbers in free fall
and continuingto slide one can’t help
wondering if any accord is a good one if only to defray attention away from
even bigger debacles.

Notable ObamaDemocratic cheerleaders like Sens. Menendez
of New Jersey and Schumer of New York have voiced their disapproval. Sen.
Schumer pointed out in a letter to Secretary of State Kerry that the agreement
“would not require Iran to even meet the terms of prior United Nation Security
Council resolutions.” Those terms explicitly stated a complete suspension of
nuclear production.

Trusting the Iranians may be
tough to swallow for Americans who haven’t forgotten the 1979 Islamic Revolution
and the kidnapping of American personnel from our embassy. They were held in
captivity for 444 days. That coupled with the fact that Iran is a ready ally
for any terrorist organization in the world that wishes harm to the Great
Satan can be discomforting.

This mode of diplomacy is eerily
reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain’swithHerr Hitler. The Munich
Accords were also a first step with the promise of more concessions coming from
Hitler at a later date. Well, we know those concessions never came to fruition.
I would venture to guess that when we re-visit this plan with the Iranians in six months – duration of Part 1, the Iranians
willinvoke a much harder line especially
when we are about to appease them with lifting some of the very sanctions that brought
them to the negotiating table in the first place. Ostensibly, losing that
leverage now reduces any significant long term gains. In the short term it
further de-stabilizes the most volatile
region on earth.

Perhaps the president and his
secretary of state should have consulted the sage Yogi Berra before forging
ahead with this agreement because “it feels like déjà vu all over again.”

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

I know there are righteous African-Americanswho find the infamous Knockout game as
repugnant as I dobut it seems they aren't repulsed enough to come out in public to condemn it. Unlike the white civil rights workers who risked life and limb to fight against racial injustice in the South of the Sixties. Where’s the Attorney General offering
guidelines for enforcement and prosecution on this matter. He’s probably still
busy trying to figure out what happened with "Fast and Furious" and ways to railroad that exonerated sick, punk George
Zimmerman.

And where’s the president. Now surely one of thosehooded perpetrators we have seen in the videos punching
out elderly men, women and children could have been your son if you had a son.
Just as you said, Mr. President, that Trayvoncould have been.

There is something underfoot and all Americans of non-color
should take note. There is no government institutionthat seems willing to support and safeguard
you from crimes perpetrated against you and your family by the marauding gangs of
predators who have, for the most part, been brought up as wards of the state.

For months these vicious attacks have been going on and it
took until last Saturday for Rev. Sharpton to condemn them as “deplorable.”
What is even more deplorable is the fact that the subject was not brought up
earlier. Especially when it has been reported that some of the attacks have
resulted in fatalities. And all have resulted in injury.

I suppose the righteous reverends reserve theirrage for people like Paula Deen who used the
N-word something like 35 years ago.

When one of the targetsof these assaults pulls out a weapon and kills the attacker the
African-American community will predictably lock arms and demand justice for the innocent
attacker. They’ll dust off his third grade picture, hide all recent photosand hate laden tweets. And the media will
tune up their violins.

Indeed the media isn’t sure these attacks are racially
motivated. I almost swallowed my tongue
when I came across the paragraph below from a story by the Associated Press’ Colleen
Long:

“While some of those attacked have been white, and some
suspected attackers black, expertssaid
the incidents are more about preying on the seemingly helpless than race or
religion.”

I think it’s time thatpeoplewho can’t depend
on pigmentation protection should find the means to protect themselves. Be alert
and on the lookout for these cowardly
reprobates. Economically, boycott those
companies who always cave to the vitriol of the good reverends.If they give in to them, go elsewhere to buy. Let the reverends and
their constituencies provide the economic shortfall.

And prepare yourself to ignore the multitude of voices who
will want to wheel out the platitudes of helping these young people with more
aid, more free meals, more before and after
school programs. More this; more that. More. More. More. To that I say, enough;
enough; enough.

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Everyone remembers where they were on the afternoon of
November 22, 1963. But I remember where I was on another date also etched
deeply in my memory: January 20, 1961.

The night before and early morning hours of that Friday brought
down upon the Mid-Atlantic statesa
significant snow storm. The morning radio had already proclaimed the glad
tidings of a snow day off from school. But the severe cold weather and snow
precluded outdoor activities. We were stuck inside. A captive audience for one
of the most brilliantly delivered presidential inaugural addresses of all time.
I had never heard such eloquence, such patriotism, such hope; and indeed a
stroke of belligerence, warning friend and foe alike “that the torch had been passed to a new generation
of Americans.” And that we would remain a beacon for freedom throughout the
world whatever its cost.

I can still see the steaming clouds of breath emanating from our young
president’s mouth, a testament to the bitter weariness of January, as he braved
the harsh elements coatless upon the steps of the capitol. He showed a strength
and resilience which made me proud to be an American. More importantly his
address made me aware what the concomitant responsibilities of an American were: honor and service to country.

To many people today those words sound trite even foolish.
But they still resonate with me. People will say it was a different time; a
different era. And it was to be sure. Until
our collective naiveté was shattered in
Dallas.

Another president assumed the Oval office with almost the
same amount o f promise. He, too, was educated at Harvard and was brilliant.
He, too, was going to be transformational. He too was a visionary who would
bring us all together. The American family united once again. As I watched this
president be sworn in, I had an empty feeling in the pit of my stomach. I was
angry at myself for not having voted forhim. I would be reduced somehow, I thought, in the years to come having to admit the omission. Because on that
day he reminded me of John Kennedy.

It soon became apparent, Barak Obama, like Dan Quayle, was
no John Kennedy. The wit was wasn’t there. The anecdotes and ad libs were
missing as well. His banter with the Washington press corps. seemed stilted and
staged. He stumbled badly when his teleprompter mal-functioned. He was thin
skinned; not erudite. He was unwilling to work with the opposition or admit
mistakes. He assembled an incompetent cabinet, some with tax evasion problems –
hardly the best and the brightest. Instead of encouraging self reliance he
worships at the altar of big government. The inverse of that wonderful phrase
from 50 odd years ago: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you
can do for your country.”

JFK has evolved from a man to an ideal in the years since
his death. But like any man he was subject to the pratfalls of humanity and they have
been amply delineated. Yetthey haven’t
lessened his enduring message of hope and freedom. Rest in peace, Mr.
President.

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Oprah
Winfrey recently weighed in on the President Obama’s fall from grace and his
loss of credibility with the American people due, of course, with his lack of
honesty detailing the tenets of the Affordable Care Act. According to Ms.
Winfrey, a lot of the president’s troubles are the result of racism, not his
ineptitude. Question – was she talking about black racists who consider him
white; or white racists who consider him black? After all he is bi-racial. No
answer needed. I’ve never met a bi-racial person who ever considered themselves
white rather than black.

It appears
when things start going south for the president some ally of his can promptly
whip out the race card to explain away the terrible job he has done with the
economy, the Affordable Health Care Act, formerly known as Obamacare, and his
foreign policy. Unless you capitulate to his every whim; even if you feel it
will result in certain failure, you are racist.

I suppose
Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel and President Hollande of France are equally
suspect of being racists because of their opposition to the administration’s
willingness to forge ahead with easing sanctions against Iran despite their
feelings that the proposed agreement, supported by the administration, did
little to assuage the fears of our allies about the prospect of an Iran with a
nuclear weapon capability.

But closer
to home, there are still real pockets of racism. There is no disputing that.
And we can only hope that in the near future it can be lobotomized from the
American psyche. Or we can wait until they (the Southern and old time racists) all die off,
as Ms. Winfrey would have it.

But let’s
not be naïve. Racism is a double-edged sword. We only hear a one-sided version
because whites against blacks racism fit a familiar and accepted narrative that
allows the race hucksters to thrive and divide the will of the righteous. In
the past six months there have been three reported episodes of black racism
against whites. Delbert “Shorty” Belton, an 88-year-old WWII veteran from
Spokane, Washington, was beaten to death by two black juveniles in August. That
same month, Christopher Lane, a 22-year-old Australian baseball player, was
shot to death by three bored juveniles in Oklahoma, two of which were black;
then in September in Union Square, New York, a reprobate by the name of Lashawn
Marten, 31, spewing the venomous phrase “I’m going to punch the first white man
I see,” punched Jeffrey Babbitt, 62. Mr. Babbitt eventually succumbed to his
injuries. Marten assures us he is not racist. That’s comforting.

After the
headlines faded so did the stories. Who will stand with the families of those
victims. If the Revs. Jackson and Sharpton were more men of the cloth than men
of green silk fiber paper they would truly stand for injustice wherever they
find it.

As for Ms.
Winfrey, as of late, she has all the sincerity of a game show host. I’m not so
sure President Obama is the only one who has lost credibility with the American
people.

Thursday, November 14, 2013

I’ve often thoughtthe Obama administration is a mirror image of the Nixon
administration. Enemy lists, IRS audits for those who disagree with edicts from
on high, the stifling of criticism. When the Watergate scandal became front
page news and Nixon’s poll numbers dropped precipitously, the people cried out
for his ouster. But it was his own party -- the Republicans -- who started the mechanism
for his removal from office.

Throughout the last five years, there was nary a wordfrom the Democratsspoken out of turn about President’s Obama’s
less than stellar performance and none at all from the adoring media. But like
rats jumping off a sinking ship self preservation trumps adoration.

Former President Clinton came out recently and in so many
words called President Obama a liar. And advised him that he should honor his
commitment to the American people about keeping their health insurance if they
liked the plan in which they were enrolled.

Now that Mr. Clinton has broken ranks other Democrats have
followed suit, most notably Sen. Feinstein and Sen. Landrieu . Now I know President
Clinton and Sen. Landrieu are not disagreeing with the president for altruistic
reasons. Landrieu is up for re-election in 2014 and stands little hope of
holding her office if the Affordable Care Act is implementedwith its own inherent, pre-existing
conditions.

Likewise, Mr. Clinton is positioning himself for his wife’s
presidential run in 2016 and knows that sticking by the president is like dousing
her with gasoline and advising her to walk over some hot coals. Mrs. Clinton
has remained silent letting Bill do the dirty work (although both are practiced
at the art of deception) while she ostensibly stays above the fray. After all
she has enough of her own baggage to carry, i.e.: Benghazi and the entire debacle
of the Arab spring.

Now maybe the
intransigent administration may have little choice but to heed the will of the
people who were wary from the beginning of replacing the best healthcare system
in the world with what is proving to be the worst.

Believe it or not there are still a few stalwarts in the Democrat party
who are totally oblivious to the current political winds. Congresswoman Debbie
Wasserman Schultz actuallysaid that many Democrats will want to run on
Obamacare in 2014. And, of course, Harry “Three Tongue” Reid is confident the problems with the Affordable Health Care
Act will be resolved.

I guess some rats wait until the last moment before the ship
capsizes.

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Was anyone really surprised when the talks recently broke down
regarding an Iran nuclear pact.

It comes as no surprise to Israel’s Prime Minister Bebe
Netanyahu. The Iranians have been playing the international community for
years. And though they appear to be willing to sit and talk doesn’t necessarily
mean they’re willing to negotiate and allow international inspectors to
determine for themselves independently how far along they are in their
pursuit of nuclear power.

Many were encouraged with the election this year of a new
president, Hassan Rouhani. Consideredmuch more moderate than his predecessor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad --Attila the
Hun would have been considered more moderate—there was reason for optimism.

President Obama ever the progressive sought a face-to-face
with the new leader in September when he was in New York to address the United
Nations but was denied by the Iranians, citing complications such a meeting
would invoke in Iran. That might have been an omen as to the success any talks
might produce. Instead they chatted on the phone.

It was a nice gesture for both. But we are still at the
crossroads of a potentially dangerous situation. The recently completed talks
have accomplished nothing except, of course, the stalling of time which isan advantage for the Iranians who have refused
to put a halt to its nuclear program for up to six months in exchange for
modulating the sanctions now in place.

But also important, they have refused to put a stop to the
construction of a heavy-water reactor near the city of Arak which would be
capable of producing plutonium, which like enriched uranium, can be used for
bomb making materials. Once this facility is operational a military mission to
destroy it would have grave environmental consequences.

Again time is of the essence and the bickering back and
forth gives Iran more time to develop weapons and Israel less time to secure its
long-term safety. Netanyahu can see the endgame. Once Iran has a nuclear
weaponIsrael’s security would be
non-existent. The Middle East would be even more de-stabilized than it is now –
hard to imagine.

Netanyahu has said repeatedly that Rouhani, unlike Ahmadinejad,
who was a wolf in wolf’s clothing, is a lamb in wolf’s clothing. Hopefully,
President Obama will abandon any efforts to ease the harsh sanctions until Iran
negotiates in good faith. And that’s unlikely.

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Those who are employed in the ever-shrinking private sector
look with disdain at the typical government worker. They enjoy inflated
salaries, extended benefits, time off for every holiday. There are even
discussions in some states about getting Ground Hog’s Day off (hyperbolic
license invoked here). No stress and most importantly no real service or
products produced. Cost of living increases are automatic, unlike the private
sector where increases are measured in performance tied to profitability. No
such burdens in the public sector.

And when public
employees are called upon to actually do something it usually results in an item
in a monologue on a late night TV show. We’ve seen how the Affordable Care Act
portal is functioning. Hey, the jokes write themselves.

One such staff is under scrutiny now. And the fact that it
works for a Tea Party favorite has supplied additional fuel to the controversy.

Rand Paul was recently taken to task for lifting parts of a speech from Wikipedia. Although taking
personal responsibility, his staff, like many others, serve as a buffer in the
government sector. They insulate their bosses from awkward situations, impaling
themselves on the sword instead of the person whose name is on the door of the
big office.

A typical senate
staff is comprised of 34 members. You would think that ample to research and
write a short speech, report or position paper. Apparently not. And Sen. Paul,
a White House hopeful in 2016, was made to look foolish having to explain the
happenstance. Justifiably, he was taken to task by the liberal media led by
Rachel Maddow.

According to a senior advisor, the senator’s opinions and
ideas are his own, but there are staff members he has relied on in the past to
provide supporting facts and anecdotes — some of which were not
clearly sourced or vetted properly.

When I heard that I thought of pizza cartons
and half finished bottles of beer and a group of staffers sitting around a
table to decide which “anecdotes” to use for the senator’s upcoming
appearances.

Staffer 1:“What about the one about that old catfish Mike that old
codger told us about in Lexington last year?”

Staffer 2: “Does Rand even like fishing?”

Staffer3: What does it matter? It’s the story
of steadfast striving to achieve. It fits all his policy initiatives and I
think it would really resonate with the folks at that manufacturing plant. A
lot of factory workers fish.”

Staffer 2: “Wait, wait. I got it. What about
the a story of the senator working part-time in high school to save enough money
to buy that ’60 Chevy. Then he could sayhe washed and waxed that suckerevery weekend.”

Staffer 1: “Sucker, yes. Perfect .That fits
nicely with his position on personal responsibility. But did he really have a
part-time job in high school? Or a Chevy?”

Staffer 3: “Didn’t everyone?”

Staffer 2: “I guess. But shouldn’t we run it by
Rand?”

Staffer 1: “I think he’s in there with Doug and
Gail working on his weekly op-ed piece for the Washington Times and ways to
embarrass Gov. Christie.”

Tuesday, November 5, 2013

It’s been one year since our presidential election. And
overall things are going downhill faster than President Obama can promise his
core constituencies another handout, bailout or exemption. And with the benefit
of hindsight we can now see how duplicitous the Democrats were in making
promises they had no business keeping. Who doesn’t have “buyers’ remorse?”

Who now wouldn’t have preferred Gov. Romney? Whether you admit
it or not he would have been running the country with class and efficiency. Instead of the ineptitude that seems the hallmark of President Obama’s
team e.g.: Fast and Furious, Benghazi, theIRS scandal, surveillance on friend and foe.As each day goes by we have another reason to
be disappointed. So do our allies. At
this point it’s getting embarrassing. Don’t get me wrong I don’t plan on
relocating to Estonia anytime soon. But I would like to see something other
than Jay Carney, the president’s press secretary, parse, obfuscate, and even at
times, evade answering direct questions. And when he does answer a question it’s
usually to tell us how well the economy is improving. Or why something is the
fault of the Tea Party.

We should cut Mr. Carney some slack, I mean the man has as
tough a job asBaghdad Bob had toting the party line for Saddam Hussein.
There never seems to be a problem in the Obama White House. It’s sort of like
Candy Land. But if someone in the press corps. should have the gall to ask about the myriad
of mishaps they are always assured that the latest miscue is being remedied at
that very moment and that the president knew nothing about it. But, now having
learned about it, he is in command and taking charge. The president seems to learn a lot about what’s going on
in his administration from TV. Maybe he should pare down his staff and
subscribe to CNN. The Republicans would be happy for the spending cut.

Yes, he likes taking charge. Like when he took control of
the Syrian chemical attack accusations made by Syrian rebels. Textbook
leadership. Delegate it to someone else. In this case, President Putin.

Now his legacy piece of legislation, the Affordable Care Act
or Obamacare is proving problematic. The rollout was a fiasco. Even Obama
zealots would agree. Now they’re going to fix it. It appears there’s nothing
they can’t fix. Unfortunately they have many opportunities to use their
restorative powers.

Thursday, October 31, 2013

The baseball season concluded with a 6-1 Boston victory to
award the 2013 Red Sox their third World Series title in 10 years. No one
expected they would have any chance of getting into the playoffs after
losing 93 games last year under manager Bobby Valentine. Indeed the team seemed
to implode under his leadership but there seems to be some indomitable spirit
that lives in Fenway Park – it’s that old stadium, their fans and a feeling
that any setback can be righted. With a resiliency rarely found in any other
place.

The Boston Tea party launched our revolution against
tyranny. Last April, two terrorist brothers, on welfare, planted explosives that
killed and maimed. While this World Series victory won’t repair the broken
lives of those Bostonians, it goes a long way in assuaging the pain and anguish
suffered on that day. Moreover, it defines who we are as a nation. We never
give up and we always find a way to victory.

So did the Bosox of 2013.

There’s been much written about the similarities of this
team and the 1967 Red Sox. That "Impossible Dream" team, too, conquered all odds and captured the
American League pennant after losing 90 games the previous season. Just like
this year, they were written off before the first pitch of spring training. In
’67, they lostto the St. Louis Cardinals in seven; this time they won in convincing fashion in six.

Over the last few years there seems to be a groundswell of
support for the Red Sox. Even in metro New York/ New Jersey, they have made
great inroads supplanting the Yankees as the AL team of choice. Many are just
front runners jumping off a sinking ship (typical Yankee fans) due to the
uncharacteristic ineptitude of the current Yankee roster. They have become a victim of
their own haphazard spending sprees to the detriment of their once well-stocked
farm system. Now it’s depleted and they are left with aging and brittle stars
and at least one pompous ass who likes the spotlight as much as the
Kardashians.

As a Boston Red Sox fan I enjoy watching the Yankees
foundering almost like a glorified, expansion team. And, of course, for all the
times they humiliated the Red Sox over the years. Finally good has triumphed
over the evil empire. And the Red Sox with their ever changing cast of
characters sit atop the world of baseball.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

When the first swirls of white smoke unfurled from the
Sistine Chapel and plumed the skies over St. Peter’s Squareon March 13, 2013, signaling the election of a new
pope the throngs of pilgrims waiting below cheered as they customarily
do for a new vicar of Christ on earth.
It’s the most exciting ritual in the Catholic Church. Drama, intrigue,
speculation all culminating in a medieval Baroque coronation.

With the installation of Pope Francis, there seemed a
markeddifference from his two
predecessors. The obvious, of course, was that he was from South America and
the first pontiff elected in the modern era from somewhere other than Europe. But he seemed humble,
reticent.

John Paul II was an outspoken critic ofCommunism. His contributions and support for Solidarnosc, the Polish Union who
resisted the Soviet puppet government of Prime Minister Jaruzelski nearly cost
him his life. No one would question his leadership or braveryduring his tenure. Benedict XVI also made
many contributions to the church.His
were mainly canonical in nature. Both, however, were intransigent ideologues,
resisting any changes to the traditionalist tenets of Catholicism. Nor did they
offer any prescient insights concerning the emerging issues facing the Catholic
Church during their reigns, foremost: pedophilia, homosexuality, abortion and contraception.

Not only has Francisshed light on these issues he has spoken up and faulted the church for being “obsessed”with gays, abortion and contraception. He has
tasked himself with making the church a “home for all.”

"The church has sometimes locked
itself up in small things, in small-minded rules,” the pontiff has been quoted
as saying. "The people of God want pastors, not clergy acting like
bureaucrats or government officials."

Nor do they want to see the wealth of
the Church wasted on the shepherds instead of the flock. A story emerged
recently when Francis saw a high-ranking church official waiting for a car to pick him up. He asked the
clergyman where he was going. When he was told of the destination, only a short
distance from where they were standing, he asked him –can’t you walk?

The most egregious ostentation has now
been noted in the Holy Father’s suspension of German bishop, Franz Tebartz-van
Elst, the so-called “Bishop of Bling.” The MostReverend Franz Tebartz-van Elst, and the most profligate, is said to
have spent $42 million renovating his residence in Limburg. Forty-two million
dollars! How many hungry people could have been fed; how many children could
have been spared from depravity and adequately clothed or cared for with such a
sum? Is the clergy a calling or a career choice? Makes you wonder.

Francis reflects the lifestyle of
a true pastor. He is a man who carries his own bags; lives a simple existence
in a humble apartment eschewing the pretentious trappings of his office. I wouldn’t
be surprised if someday we hear the chants of “Santo subito; Santo subito,”
echo once again.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

When I see the beedy-eyed, three-tongued Nevada Senator
Harry Reid approach any podium to do his part to help steer the ship of state,
my first impression is to look for the lifeboats. He lacks any semblance of
leadership beyond flicking the switchfor the robotic Oblivicrats who
march in step to whatever forwards the “progressive” agenda. The path to bi-partisanshipis strewn with as much debris as the road to
Damascus. And the Repudicans, headed by Mitch “I’ll make any deal you want as
long as I can get an earmark out of it” McConnell, are equally inept.

But since the Democrats control the Senate, Reid gets much
more media face time to use to denigrate his favorite enemy the Tea Party for
their collective gall for voicing their opinions. He would prefer insteadto hear theconcerns of the Occupy Wall Street
gang and other “progressive” groups.

Reid has as much integrity as a carnival barker on the
midway at a state fair. He’s made so many smoke-filled back room deals he
stands a chance of getting cancer from second hand smoke.

He had acinematic
doppelganger in one of my favorite movies, Godfather
II. He reminds meof that nefarious
Nevada (merely coincidence) senator who in the beginning of the film is throwing ethnic epithets at Michael
Corleone only to become a useful conduit
for the mob. We knew what drove that character: money and “those red-haired
Yolandas.” I apologize. I know much too
much dialogue from thatfilm. What drives Sen. Reid? Is it merely his aspiration to control power?

Since it’s getting close to Halloween and mischief night and
I haven’t done anything mischievous for sometime might I suggest a little prank
on Sen. Reid. How about getting some Tea Party front group to make a donation
to his political war chest , then after his political machine accepts it, expose
him for being a hypocrite. All politicians are hypocrites, some more than
others; none more than Sen. Reid. Sorry I forgot about his sidekick,
Congresswoman Pelosi. And Mitch McConnell and John McCain and…

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Every so often, usually when the NFL season is under way, we
begin to hear how various Indian groups feel maligned about the nicknames of
some of our sports teams. Most notably the Washington Redskins. Perhaps that
terminology does seem insensitive but that glorious warrior logo on the Redskins’
helmets on one of the teams I despise (being a Giant fan, though I hate to
admit it this season) is an image that reinforces my respect for Native
Americans. Likewise, I feel the same way about the Braves, Chiefs and Blackhawks.
I do find the logo for the Cleveland Indians
offensive. It wouldn’t be a bad idea, as has been suggested to start phasing
out Chief Wahoo. His demise in Cleveland is already underway and that’s a good
thing. But for the other logos andnicknames, I don’t see any explicit racism.

This issue is again in the spotlight most recently since
President Obama, the panderer-in-chief, weighed in on the subject of the Redskins,
suggesting if he were the owner of the team he wouldn’t want to offend anyone. Bob
Costas, once an ascendant sportscaster now relegated to finding controversial
issues to weigh in on to thicken his exposure, also voiced his disapproval. But
to his credit, Daniel Snyder, owner of the Redskins, has remained adamant in
his intransigence not to change his team’s name.

Tucker Carlson, Fox News gadfly, a self-proclaimed Swede,
transmogrified the situation when he said he was upset about the Minnesota Vikings. He didn’t want his ancestry
reduced to images of murdering and plunderingtheir way to Valhalla as the nickname “Vikings” might imply. Haven’t yet
heard any response yet from the Vikings on his suggestion.

The tyranny of minorities seems to be on the upswing.
Everyone is upset with something. How long do you think it will be before
Somali pirates take umbrage with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Pittsburgh
Pirates denigrating their proud tradition of kidnapping and murdering?

Thursday, October 17, 2013

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down half this wall; then we can
discuss tearing down the rest of it.” Of course, President Reagan never uttered
those words. He wasn’t fond of the so called “kicking the can down the road”
approach to solving problems. He faced them head on and didn’t compromise on
principle. These days two months of harmony rather than a definitive answer to
our pressing problems is far more
palatable to our elected officials in
Washington. Moreover, it is considered a great accomplishment.

Last night as the president took the podium to announce the
breakthrough lifting the debt ceiling and ending the government shutdown, he
appeared as presidentialas he has in
quite some time, rather than therecalcitrant childwho refused to
negotiatein the weeks prior. No doubt
under his breath, while he spoke of bi-partisan efforts and cooperation, he was
crowing about his latest triumph over a rudderless Republicanparty who can’t seem to get out of the way of
themselves. Harry “Three Tongue” Reid was also magnanimous in his praise for
his Republican counterparts who finally caved after some apocryphal polls
surfaced last weekend, placing the blame
on the shutdown squarely on the GOP. When the polls were made public there was
a run on white surrender flags and manufacturers were having difficulty keeping up with Republican
demand.

Last night the president also said that the government will
have to work hard to gain the trust of the American people. This might be a bit
tougher for you, sir. The convoluted Affordable Health Care Act has yet to
impact the nation and no one seems to know for sure what those ramifications
will be. The only consensus is that the overall
costs will be much higher than promised.

Still,Mr. Obama is
ready to press on. It was interesting last night how he snuck in a reference to another hot button item he is ready to address:
immigration reform. It’s sure to be just as polarizing as health care reform.
So expect a repeat of the gridlock that is a hallmark of the Obama presidency.

So a word of advice to banner manufacturers and weavers of
white cloth better now to increase your inventories, the Republicans will be
needing you soon.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

If anyone still believes President Obama is trying to bring
us all together, you’ve probably been in a coma for the last five years.
Hopefully you’re ok now and, if you are, welcome back!

One of the most disconcerting things to happen since this
ludicrous government shutdown was the exclusion of World War II veterans from
the Capitol mall and the use of the mall for anImmigration Amnesty demonstration. No matter what your politics, you had
to be disheartened watching this story unfold. Any red-blooded American who fails
to see the gross disparity in this needs a refresher course in world history and
not the revisionist view now being fed to students in American classrooms.

I grew up in an atmosphere of pride in my father and uncles,
and the fathers and uncles of my friends, most of whom served in the last great
war. Some marchedtriumphantly through the streets of
Parisafter the German war machine was
destroyed. Others celebrated on VJ Day.

They were real heroes. They never liked to talk about their war service. They didn’t
want to re-liveall the atrocities they
witnessed, bravely engaging the enemy to keep our country safe and free. In
those days that was considered merely
doing your duty. Now that country, which will never see another generation like
them, turns their back and excludes them from accessing a memorial in their
honor.

Not only did the immigration demonstrators fail to see how truly selfish they looked
juxtaposed against the backdrop of these elderly former servicemen, they missed
a rare opportunity to bolster their whole effort and possibly win over some of
their opponents on amnesty. Just think for a moment if even a handful of
demonstrators found their way to the veterans and joined with them in a show of
solidarity; or pay them some type of homage in recognition for their service to
this country. It would have been a public relations windfall for them and a great
picture to behold. In America, though, we don’t see great pictures anymore. We see hatred and
division at every turn. You’re doing a hell of a job, Mr. President.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

As we look forward to the NJ Senate election next week we
see two candidates in stark contrast. Lonegan, stressing the need for self reliance
and individual responsibility and the other, Booker, playing the liberal violin
about helping the downtrodden because they don’t have the tools to pull
themselves out of the morass they find themselves in.

Booker’s message is getting tiresome and doesn’t resonate any longer. After years, decades and now
generations of failed socialengineering,
the city of Newark remains an empty shell of what was once a great city. The
Public Relations wordsmiths can changethe city's nickname anytime they like: “Brick City,” “Renaissance City,” but
really the best moniker would be failed city. Can anyone really look at Newark
and say the city has made great strides under the leadership of Cory Booker the
last seven years? Booker can. He cites statistics showing how well the city is
doing. But like any good football coach will tell you, stats are for losers; moreover they can be easily manipulated. Do
we believe Mr. Booker and his team or our own eyes when we see Newark residents
up in arms and worryingabout the safety
of their families?

His sleight of hand has distracted from his lack of leadership and even his
responsibility to help the citizens of Newark. Who would have thought we would pine for the days of Sharpe
James? Aside from all his faults, and there were many, he personified Newark. Booker,
too, personifies Newark a little
differently, with hat in hand as he slithers
his way from talk show to talk show and cocktail party to gala reception. He
has gotten some substantial help from his celebrity friends but I don’t think
these friends will be so generous if he leaves City Hall. Then the taxpayers of
New Jersey will again be forced to pick
up the shortfall to keep the city on
life support, as Lonegan intimated in
their final debate.

Booker is a new, “new age” politician. He’s attractive, well
packaged by his handlers, focused group to the nth degree, subscribes to the
theory that the more you can blame the tea party the more you help your chances
of looking intellectually superior. The only item not required for the new age
pol is accomplishment. Does he remind you of anyone?

Lonegan has been vastly outspent in this senate
campaign and yet he has kept the race
close. Can he win? At least he has a puncher’s chance to pull it out and I don’t
think anyone thought he’d still be on his feet in the 12th round.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Well it wasn’t reminiscent of the
Lincoln/Douglas Debates but the first confrontation between Cory Booker and
Steve Lonegan was substantive and even more importantly, gentlemanly and civil. More than I can say for
the myriad of debates that went on across the river during New York’s
Democratic mayoralty primary debates.

Both Lonegan and Booker characterized the other as extremist in their views. Both
are diametrically opposed politically, of course. Lonegan is a real conservative and makes
no excuses for his positions on abortion, gun control, reducing big government,
Obamacare, entitlements and education. Likewise Booker, as you would expect, adheres to the Democratic mantra of helping the ever- growing list of constituencies that need some type of taxpayerassistance.

But the best part of the debate was watching Booker point to
his record of achievement in Newark. If it wasn’t for the fact that people in
Newarkare in such dire straits his
performancewould be great material for a Saturday Night Live skit.

Mayor Booker cited growth, expansion. Where? Okay a few
companies have moved their headquarters to Newark, like Manischewitz and Panasonic but did that put a dent in
Newark’sunemploymentrate? Or quality of life issues?

The mayor pointed to a balanced budget. Balanced after
massive police layoffs and Prince John –like tax increases. In similar fashion President
Obama could reduce our deficitif we
sold Alaska.

When addressing Lonegan’s barbs that he is an absentee
mayor,Booker cited the need for his
travels to attract new business to enrich his city. But, as Lonegan rightly
suggested, the only one being enriched is Cory Booker.

Mr. Booker is just another store bought politician. Slick,
smooth and all smoke and mirrors.

One of the most
telling parts of the debate was when Lonegan described how he worked his way
through college doing odd jobs to help pay his tuition, coming from a one
parent home – his father having diedyears earlier. He looked at Booker and asked poignantly, “did you even
have a job when you were in college?” Bookerstood there blankly with no answer. And he’ll have no answers for New
Jersey just as he hasn’t had any for the city of Newark for seven years.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Remembering my childhood I often recall how my mother and
aunts would assuage one of the kids who
came running to them crying because of some infraction perpetrated on them by
one of the other kids. They would always dispense the same facetious piece of
advice. “Fight nice.” This age-old sage advice would best be practiced by our
less than sage plutocrats in Washington: Obama, Boehner, Reid and Pelosi, et al,
as they continue to point fingers of blame
at each other for the government shutdown.

Both sides have genuine sympathy for folks being adversely
affected. Somehow, the Republicans, though, always seem to get the short end of
the stick in the PR War when something goes awry in the country. I guess the Obama
administration has the media to thank for that and especially for all the positive spin it got in getting the
Affordable Care Act (ACA) passed. But now the theory must become reality.

The Democrats remain adamant that they will not change a law
that has been passed, though it passed without a single Republican vote. You
would think they might have been just a tad more sympathetic to the other side
of the aisle and sought their input. This was their flaw.

When the Clinton administration tried to pass healthcare
legislation, one of the mostintelligent
gentlemen toever grace the senate
floor, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, noted that significant legislation is
passed in a bi-partisan manner or they fail.

After three plus years the law is still unintelligible to
all but a few policy wonks, who when they explain it, make it seem even more
convoluted. When the exchanges opened for people to shop for coverage on
October 1, there were snafus of biblical proportions. Apparently the program is
not ready for prime time. Will it ever be? Harry “Three Tongue” Reid had the
nerve to say that these types of glitches also plagued Google at various
points. The differenceis that Google can
get rid of those responsible for inefficiency whereas the government will only
add more bureaucratic blubber to try and fix it.

Why does the law grant waivers to the president’s staunchest
supporters and Congress. If it’s good for the rest of us why not them?

I’m sure a compromise on the impasse can be reached. But the
president will have to think about leveling the playing field if he wants the
Republicans to go along with his budget recommendations. Until then, fight
nice.

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

Since 9/11 there has been a burgeoning new category of
entertainment programming dealing with the war on terrorism and the civilized
world’s way of containing and preventing anothercatastrophe of that magnitude.

There has been a plethora of titles both in film and
television dealing with these issues: “Zero Dark Thirty,” “The Hurt Locker,” “The
Kingdom,” “24,” “MI-5,”etc. But the best of these offerings is Showtime’s
“Homeland,” which had its season premiere on Sunday. The taut writing, dramatic story
lines and characterization has made this show the apotheosisof the genre.

For the uninitiated, “Homeland” revolves around the lives of
two star-crossed lovers. One a bi-polar, CIA Analyst, Carrie Mathison; the
other, Nicholas Brody, a Marine turned Islamic extremist while in captivity in Syria where
he sees first hand the atrocities
perpetrated by his own country. This is the Stockholm Syndrome to the max. Upon hisreturn home he is feted as a hero. The political establishment seizing
on an opportunity to create a new star helps get him elected toa seat in the U.S. Congress where, unbeknownst to them, he continues to
plot against his homeland. Or, has he seen the light, after being exposed and the
requisite amount of threats, as his lover contends?

In last year’s season ending cliffhanger a bomb is detonated
in front of a CIA facility killing more than 200 people. The bomb is planted in
a car. The Congressman’s car. Was he complicit in the attack? Did he turn back
to the dark side? Don’t think we’ll know
until the season plays out. But this psycho drama is most compelling.

I’m not sure what makes it so but I think (and I’m not a
psychiatrist; never even have played one on television) it has something to do
with our collective need to know that at any given time our people are out
there keeping us safe 24/7 to best of their ability. Do we find solace in their
efforts; or is it the revenge factor; does it help to provide some measure of
closure for all our lost loved ones?

In episode one of this season, to atone for the
attack on the CIA facility, six complicit bad guys are taken down on three
different continents in a razor sharp operation.

Is it life imitating art or art imitating life? The line is
blurred. And I think that’s what makes shows like “Homeland” so thought
provoking and entertaining.

Thursday, September 26, 2013

I thought the 17th Amendment provides for voters
the rightto directly elect U.S. senators, eliminating the influence
peddlers of state legislatures deciding on candidates and ultimately winning
candidates. But in the NJ Senate race between Cory Booker and Steve Lonegan one
would think that the voters of New Jersey have abrogatedtheir constitutional right and ceded it to
the Hollywood glitterati. Where once the deals were made in smoke filled rooms
in convention halls, they’re now made in the most well appointed parcels of
California.

We know that vast amounts of money have been amassed for
Booker’s run. The only thing left for the obliging Oblivicrats is to march
robotically to the polls and cast their ballots. Hopefully just one ballot.
But, this is New Jersey, so you never really know.

While Steve Lonegan continues stumping the state talking
about issues in his uphill fight,Mr.
Booker continues to relishhis role as a
Hollywood A-lister, flashing his ubiquitous chicklet-like, toothy grin,
partying with the likes of Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. You would hope that with
the doggerel coming out of Hollywood these days that these two reputable and
highly paid actor/directors wouldbe
devoting more time providing quality entertainment instead of massaging the ego
of the liberal left ‘s newest superstar. And while they’re massaging how about
throwing in a manicure and pedicure to make the mayor feel right at home.

Perhaps Mayor Booker is pitching ideas. It being tinsel
town. How about a story of an upstart
mayor of a decaying northeast city where unemployment is off the charts and crime is running rampant: shootings, rapes,
car jackings, muggings. And for a bit of
conflict how about having the mayor appear apathetic and unavailable. This
might be a stretchfor Matt and Ben, but
the mayor, on the basis of his non-existent record of improvement, decides on a
run for higher office. Add a little more texture to his character. Make him
disrespectful by announcing his intentions to run for this office before the ailing incumbent, a tireless workerfor his constituency,has a chance to decide what his plans are.
Put him at odds with his own city
council. Make him arrogant, elitist. But then he sees the light and with the
help of some imaginary friendsbecomes a
super hero of sorts, rising to the level of mediocrity. Too far fetched?Well, the good mayor is in the land of make
believe where chicken excrement can be made to look like chicken salad or
braised tofu.